Deal Gives State New Role in Baltimore Schools, Boosts Aid

An 11th-hour deal struck last week would give Maryland an
unprecedented say in the management of the Baltimore public schools and
boost state aid to the financially and academically troubled district
by more than $250 million over five years.

After weeks of round-the-clock negotiations, Maryland Gov. Parris N.
Glendening, Baltimore Mayor Kurt L. Schmoke, and the state schools
chief reached the tentative agreement the day a trial was to start in
three longstanding lawsuits over the funding and management of the
district.

Under the plan, the governor and the mayor would jointly appoint a
new school board from a pool of applicants chosen by the state school
board. Currently, the city's mayor--unlike any other municipal leader
in Maryland--has the sole authority to select the nine-member local
board.

The new board would designate a chief executive officer, who would
in turn select academic and financial directors. The new management
team would be charged with designing a school-improvement plan for the
110,000-student system; an independent consultant would be dispatched
to evaluate the district's progress in 2001.

The current superintendent, Walter G. Amprey, and school board
members would be eligible to seek the new positions, which could be
filled as early as March, state and city officials said. Mr. Amprey
said last week that he has not been informed about his future
prospects, but he said he would be interested in remaining in his
current job.

Last week's accord would put an end to the three lawsuits.

The American Civil Liberties Union sued the state in 1994 on behalf
of several Baltimore students, charging that the state does not provide
sufficient aid to deliver a "thorough and efficient" education, as the
state constitution requires.

A Maryland disability-rights organization sued the city in 1984,
claiming that special education students were not receiving services
they were entitled to under state and federal laws.

And the city and the state had filed suits against each other over
the adequacy of state funding.

City officials, state leaders, the disability-rights group, and the
ACLU all said they were enthusiastic about the agreement, but some
educators and parents raised questions about whether the proposed
funding boost would be adequate to address the school system's
financial needs.

More Money, Shared Power

Under the agreement, which the parties are scheduled to make final
next week, the state has pledged to provide an additional $254 million
to the district over the next five years. The school system would
receive $24 million in new construction funding as part of the plan. In
addition, the $12 million that the state withheld from the Baltimore
schools this year pending management changes would be returned to the
district.

Baltimore officials said that the estimated $50 million in
additional funding each year would go a long way toward closing the
spending gap between Baltimore and its more affluent neighbors. More
than $430 million, or two-thirds, of the district's $650 million annual
budget comes from the state. But per-pupil spending in Baltimore--about
$5,800--is still less than in neighboring districts, which spend about
$6,300 per student on average.

If the funding and new management structure are not approved by the
legislature, however, the settlement will be quashed and the parties
will be forced to return to court or forge a new accord.

The Baltimore plan marks the latest in a series of state
interventions in urban school districts in recent years. New Jersey has
seized control of three districts since 1989, and a federal judge in
Ohio ordered that state to assume control of the faltering Cleveland
district last year.

Taking a different tack, the Illinois legislature last year granted
Mayor Richard M. Daley broad authority over the Chicago district,
including the naming of a new school board and top managers.

What is unique about the Baltimore plan, education observers say, is
that the mayor and the governor would collectively choose the city's
school board.

In a flurry of announcements, state and city officials hailed the
deal as a historic partnership.

"This agreement gives us an opportunity to work together for the
benefit of the children of Baltimore," as well as avoid costly
lawsuits, Mayor Schmoke said.

Nancy S. Grasmick, the state superintendent, said she hoped that the
enterprise would help improve the educational opportunities for
Baltimore students. "We are confident that the infusion of additional
dollars can translate into better student performance, and that
management changes will ensure accountability," she said.

Only 14 percent of Baltimore students earned a satisfactory score on
statewide tests last year, and 60 percent of the city's students drop
out before they graduate, state officials said.

But Michael R. Casserly, the executive director of the Council of
the Great City Schools in Washington, said he doubted that the novel
shared-power plan would boost school performance.

"Maybe people think that arrangements like these are going to solve
[the problems of] urban education, but they're wrong," said Mr.
Casserly, who was a potential witness for the city in the scheduled
trial.

Legislative Hurdle

Parents' groups also criticized city officials last week for
surrendering too much power to the state for what they see as a modest
financial gain. The $50 million in proposed extra state funding each
year represents less than a 10 percent hike in the annual school
budget--too little to stimulate any significant change, they
argued.

"State leaders say they are for children and education, but when it
comes down to it, they don't put their money where their mouth is,"
said Ed Freeman, a founder of Friends of Education, a local parents'
group.

And Mr. Freeman said there was no guarantee that state lawmakers
would approve the extra funds.

That view was bolstered by one of the state's top lawmakers. Thomas
V. Mike Miller Jr., the state Senate president, said in an interview
last week that it was overly optimistic to expect speedy approval of
the additional aid. "We have a tight budget, and people want a leaner
government," Mr. Miller said. "I'm not sure there's a collective will
to fund this type of settlement."

Both city and state leaders said that they expect the legislature to
vote on the plan when it reconvenes in January.

Notice: We recently upgraded our comments. (Learn more here.) If you are logged in as a subscriber or registered user and already have a Display Name on edweek.org, you can post comments. If you do not already have a Display Name, please create one here.

Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.